A technique used in marketing to depict how brands are perceived relative to one another, when
mapped in two or more dimensions. Also called ‘position mapping’. A list of brands is specified,
e.g. say, ten brands of curry paste. Respondents are asked to say how similar they think these
brands are to one another (A is similar to C, D is similar to E, etc.). It is respondents' perceptions
of similarity that are captured — these might not accurately mirror objective similarities, e.g.
people may think A is similar to C when, in fact, the two brands of curry paste have quite
different ingredients. A statistical procedure is employed to obtain spatial positions of the brands
in multidimensional space to reflect these perceptions. A common procedure is multidimensional
scaling, for which there is off-the-shelf software, e.g. PREFMAP, INDSCAL. Output is depicted
as a map. This conveys the relative position of the brands, but does not relate to any absolute
measure of distance.
The number of dimensions (two, three, etc.) depends on how many are needed to plot the data
without incurring an intolerable level of stress. The dimensions themselves are derived without
labels, and great care must be taken in labelling them. A formal way to label dimensions involves
the use of attribute ratings. At the same time as similarity data are collected, the researcher asks
respondents to rate (on a ratings scale) each brand for a number of attributes (taste, quality
ingredients, price and so forth). Each attribute is assessed for how closely it corresponds with the
dimensions (low-high price may be closest to dimension 1; thus, dimension 1 is labelled the price
axis). Although formal, the selection of attributes is subjective.
In marketing, a popular alternative to the use of similarity data is the use of preference data, i.e.
data where an evaluation of one item dominates another. Data may be in the form of paired
comparisons (is A preferred over C?) or rankings (A is most preferred, followed by C, etc.).
Similar procedures apply, but with preference data it is possible to investigate ‘ideal points’, e.g.
by including a hypothetical brand X into the preference comparisons or ranking. The word
‘ideal’ here is misleading because X may be far from ideal. It is also possible to locate ideal
combinations of attributes on the map — either for individual consumers or segments — and see
which brands (if any) are close to the ideal. Various marketing implications might follow,
including the possibility of designing a new product for an unmet market (seen as an empty
quadrant on the perceptual map) or repositioning an existing product to be closer to the ideal
point of a segment than competitors. This form of analysis is very beguiling but it can be very
misleading, e.g. an empty quadrant may represent an unmet need or a phantom market, and a
new brand may get closer to the ideal point of a segment but, in so doing, change the whole
configuration of the map (including a relative shift in the ideal point). One of the most popular
business games, MARKSTRAT, uses these facets of perceptual mapping to simulate the
dynamic interplay of competing firms in established and new markets.
The technique is applied in product and brand positioning studies. new product
development;positioning; segment-target-position strategy. Informally, the ideas behind
perceptual mapping are reflected in the thinking of many marketing managers, even though they
may never make use of the formal techniques.
Copyright © Evan Davies, Graham Bannock, Mark Uncles, Paul Trot, 2003.
Save
•
•
•
•
APA
Chicago
Harvard
MLA
Perceptual mapping. (2003). In G. Bannock (Ed.), The new penguin Business Dictionary.
London, United Kingdom: Penguin. Retrieved from
http://search.credoreference.com.ezproxy.apollolibrary.com/content/entry/penguinbus/perceptual
_mapping/0
Exhibit 4-14 “Product Space” Representing Consumers’ Perceptions for
Different Brands of Bar Soap
Exhibit 4-14 shows the “product space” for different brands of bar soap
using two dimensions—the extent to which consumers think the soaps
moisturize and deodorize their skin. For example, consumers see Dove as
quite high on moisturizing but low on deodorizing. Dove and Tone are close
together—implying that consumers think of them as similar on these
characteristics. Dial is viewed as different from Dove and Tone and at a
distance from them on the graph. Remember that positioning maps are based
oncustomers’ perceptions—the actual characteristics of the products (as
determined by a chemical test) might be different!
AT&T’s cell phones have more coverage around the world as
compared with its competition. Its advertising campaign tells
customers about this point of differentiation.
Courtesy Client: AT & T; Agency: BBDO/Atlanta
Purchase answer to see full
attachment